The Official Liverpool FC Thread [Vol 17]

[m3sye]

mike74 said:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Global/Issues/...

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/1053...



Still waiting for an explanation... or is it a secret strategic plan??

• Edit this post was in response to a now deleted request for links to that quote.

Edited by mike74 on Sunday 1st March 15:50

Pre VAR

1. taintedtitle

[mike74]

Titfer said:

Well its nothing to do with your mentalist rants, that's the first thing.

Surely it's a reaffirmation of the collective nature of the premier league TV and commercial income which ensures that the less popular sides get a larger share of the revenue than they would if they were left to their own devices.

What utter tosh, no amount of ''increased'' TV revenue is going to allow the majority of clubs to realistically compete with the spending power of the top 4 wealthiest clubs.

[Pommy]

mike74 said:

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Global/Issues/...

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/1053...



Still waiting for an explanation... or is it a secret strategic plan??

• Edit this post was in response to a now deleted request for links to that quote.

Edited by mike74 on Sunday 1st March 15:50

Oh, you're serious?!

Well, given you just posted the same interview by two sources kinda negates making it look like a multiply said thing.

Also it was posted August 2016 and given you won it in18 and 19 that would mean City won it after he announced there was a strategy to have a different winner and you won it after Leicester and Chelsea - so City therefore won it in a fix according to you.

So you basically just made City look liks they were fixed to win it.

He also makes no mention of Liverpool and said every 6 years and that was posted 2016, so unless its 2022 we seem to have got it early.

[Titfer]

mike74 said:

What utter tosh, no amount of ''increased'' TV revenue is going to allow the majority of clubs to realistically compete with the spending power of the top 4 wealthiest clubs.

Crack on Mike. No more discussion from me.
Simply not worth any effort.

[Cie]

Titfer said:

mike74 said:

What utter tosh, no amount of ''increased'' TV revenue is going to allow the majority of clubs to realistically compete with the spending power of the top 4 wealthiest clubs.

Crack on Mike. No more discussion from me.
Simply not worth any effort.

There is literally zero point trying to discuss things like this with such a clown.

[mike74]

Pommy said:

Oh, you're serious?!

Well, given you just posted the same interview by two sources kinda negates making it look like a multiply said thing.

Also it was posted August 2016 and given you won it in18 and 19 that would mean City won it after he announced there was a strategy to have a different winner and you won it after Leicester and Chelsea - so City therefore won it in a fix according to you.

So you basically just made City look liks they were fixed to win it.

He also makes no mention of Liverpool and said every 6 years and that was posted 2016, so unless its 2022 we seem to have got it early.

It coincided with the same time that VAR was first being mooted, obviously it took them a couple of seasons to get their ''strategy'' up and running and operating as intended.

[jammy-git]

mike74 said:

Pommy said:

Oh, you're serious?!

Well, given you just posted the same interview by two sources kinda negates making it look like a multiply said thing.

Also it was posted August 2016 and given you won it in18 and 19 that would mean City won it after he announced there was a strategy to have a different winner and you won it after Leicester and Chelsea - so City therefore won it in a fix according to you.

So you basically just made City look liks they were fixed to win it.

He also makes no mention of Liverpool and said every 6 years and that was posted 2016, so unless its 2022 we seem to have got it early.

It coincided with the same time that VAR was first being mooted, obviously it took them a couple of seasons to get their ''strategy'' up and running and operating as intended.

"There's a conspiracy in place, but only when City don't win"

[Murph7355]

Gutted that they aren't going to go unbeaten. Really thought they could do it. (Sheff Utd fan here, but my eldest - 7 - is a Liverpool fan and I've had a soft spot for them since I was his age).

Doesn't mean anything of course, but it would have been nice for ANOther club to repeat Arsenal's feat - just goes to show what an achievement they did.

They need to pick their game up though. Missed Henderson yesterday IMO (never thought I'd hear myself say that of him - how much has he improved!). They've sailed close to the wind a few times recently and the front 3 don't seem to be firing.

Miles ahead so the title should be in the bag, but can't afford to keep sliding....if only because I'd also like to see them beat Man City's points record

[BossHogg]

mike74 said:

What utter tosh, no amount of ''increased'' TV revenue is going to allow the majority of clubs to realistically compete with the spending power of the top 4 wealthiest clubs.

Come on Mike, time for your afternoon nap, you've had enough time on the computer.

[mike74]

jammy-git said:

"There's a conspiracy in place, but only when City don't win"

Or.... ''there's not a conspiracy in place, but only when Liverpool do win it''

[Chris Stott]

mike74 said:

Awww, such wide eyed, child like naivety and innocence.

Bless

It's ironic really, an accusation of cheating coming from a fan of a club that's only won anything by consistent financial cheating

Tainted tile? Everything City have won is tainted by the smell of dirty money.

[mike74]

Chris Stott said:

It's ironic really, an accusation of cheating coming from a fan of a club that's only won anything by consistent financial cheating

Tainted tile? Everything City have won is tainted by the smell of dirty money.

It must be wonderful having the moral high ground that comes with supporting a club that has NEVER relied financially on a wealthy owner or chairman in order to achieve success... oh wait, that's right, that didn't actually matter until FFP was introduced specifically to keep the traditional ''big'' clubs at the top and not allow anyone else to threaten the cosy little cartel.

[jammy-git]

mike74 said:

It must be wonderful having the moral high ground that comes with supporting a club that has NEVER relied financially on a wealthy owner or chairman in order to achieve success... oh wait, that's right, that didn't actually matter until FFP was introduced specifically to keep the traditional ''big'' clubs at the top and not allow anyone else to threaten the cosy little cartel.

Remind me again where Arsenal, Utd, AC Milan, Monaco, etc, etc are?

[Chris Stott]

mike74 said:

It must be wonderful having the moral high ground that comes with supporting a club that has NEVER relied financially on a wealthy owner or chairman in order to achieve success... oh wait, that's right, that didn't actually matter until FFP was introduced specifically to keep the traditional ''big'' clubs at the top and not allow anyone else to threaten the cosy little cartel.

Don’t you have a match to watch? Another trophy you’re trying to buy?

[Flip Martian]

mike74 said:

Oh dear, so much rage and spittle being expelled due to my previous comment obviously touching a nerve.. blabla loopyloo...

Um no. That would be like the fine contributors to Blue Moon touching a nerve. So deranged it's not true. Maybe just accept you're not the best team in the league for once and show some dignity?

[BossHogg]

Man Citeh - dignity? - does not compute!

[m3sye]

Gone a bit AMG said:

Got a game in hand.

37

[jammy-git]

At least we can rely on Spurs (once again) to cheer us up and provide some laughs.

[TTmonkey]

Always wondered what Sye looked like, now I know.....

[NRS]

The irony is City is the club that looks like it could be stripped titles.